Which do you think is a more preferred expression?

(1) I'll see you tomorrow afternoon at four-fifteen.

(2) I'll see you at four-fifteen tomorrow afternoon.

Apple

The order of time and day of the week depends on which of the two pieces of information the speaker wants to make more salient.

If the hour is not especially significant, the order will be

"” I'll see you at four-fifteen tomorrow afternoon

If the time of day is felt to be important, "” for example, if the addressee is chronically late and the speaker wants to emphasize the time of day, or if the hour has been changed to a new one "” the time will come last:

"” I'll see you tomorrow afternoon at four-fifteen

Marilyn

So the the later the information appears, the more important it is.
I suppose the same applies in the following examples.
(1) The old Olympic record was broken by Smith in 2004.
(2) The old Olympic record was broken in 2004 by Smith.
In (1) the information of the year was more important than who broke it.
In (2) the information of who broke it is more important than when it was broken.

When more than three pieces of information are to be added, the degree of importantce corresponds to the order of words as well.

(3) The old Olympic record was broken by Smith in 2004 in Athens.
In (3), where it was broken is more important than who and when it was broken.

Am I correct so far?

Apple

That's absolutely correct. The "strong" position in English sentences is at the end (with an important exception, cleft sentences). It's called "end-focus."

Speakers of English naturally tend to put more stress on the last sentence element (unless it's a function word like a preposition). That's because the later in a message the information comes, the higher the "information value."

Quirk et al.* have an extended discussion on this principle in their Chapter 18, "Theme, focus, and information processing."

Marilyn

*A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (Longman, 1985)

Thank you always for your clarification.
I have a follow up question in regard to the importance of information.
What about the case where the time and place are stated in the beginning of the sentence?

In the following sentence (1), "In China" is more important than "in 1928"?

(1) In China, in 1928 they predicted a big earthquake.

Apple

The example sentence has an unusual word order. The only case in which one would find this word order is one where the location "” China "” is already in the discourse and therefore is considered "old" information.

When these two items of information begin a sentence and are both "new" information, one would normally expect the date to precede the place:

"” In 1928, in China, " hey predicted a big earthquake

This word order is used because the date is more general than the place, and we want to situate the event in time before we learn where the event took place.

Marilyn

One more follow up question please.

In which sentence is "1928" stressed more strongly, at the beginning or the end of the sentence?


In 1928, in China, they predicted a big earthquake.

They predicted a big earthquake in China in 1928.

Apple

In the first sentence,

"” In 1928, in China, they predicted a big earthquake

...the stress on each introductory phrase is equal. The major stress comes at the end of the sentence, on the word "earthquake," which is the most important piece of information in the sentence.

In the second sentence,

"” They predicted a big earthquake in China in 1928

...the stress is strongest on the last piece of information: "in 1928."

Marilyn